Now that the election is over, the Obama team moves on to their first of many challenges: the cabinet selection. For me, this process provides more excitement than the actual election. It is in the next few weeks that Obama will layout his vision for the country over the next 4 years.
First up, Secretary of Defense:
I find the Defense short list most intriguing. Two of the top runners are Republican Senator Chuck Hagel and current Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.
Is anyone else surprised at the Obama's willingness to address his 'softness' on terrorism and promise at bipartisanism? Is this Obama pragmatism at its finest?
-Andrew
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Us
Andrew Thornburg is pursuing a B.S. in Electrical Engineering at the University of Pittsburgh.
Andrew Noel is pursuing a B.A./M.A. in American Studies at the George Washington University.
Recommened Reading
Categories-
- al-qaeda (1)
- bush (2)
- cabinet (1)
- congress (1)
- conservative (1)
- defense (1)
- democrat (1)
- economy (1)
- first (1)
- fox news (1)
- gitmo (2)
- gop (2)
- health-care (1)
- introduction (1)
- jindal (2)
- mccain (1)
- obama (6)
- palin (2)
- president (1)
- rationale (1)
- rumsfeld (1)
- sanders (1)
- schiff (1)
- senate (1)
- terrorism (1)
2 comments:
I believe to say that P-E Obama's prospects for Secretary of Defense are based upon primarily upon the notion of bipartisanship is a dangerous mistake that only Wolf Blitzer and his dancing hologram would make.
The definition of "change" in Obama's campaign is key to this understanding. He used to advocate bipartisanship at the zenith of his political rhetoric, but the maturation of the P-E and the evolution of the nature of the campaign prompted him to abandon this notion. I think this is because what Obama has really been fighting is the actualization of extreme political ideology in the past 8 years. Ideological politics is the root cause of the polarization in our political system. Bipartisanship fixes the effects, but it does not get to the root of the problem. Hell, John McCain is bipartisan, but he was not going to turn the American political system around.
What will fix the polarized politics of ideology in this country is the counteraction of pragmatism. Even Pat Buchanan, the right-of-center political analyst remarked late in the presidential campaign that he believed "in [his] heart, [he] believe[s] Obama is a pragmatist." Obama realizes right now that the true reclamation of government efficiency is an overarching spirit of pragmatism. In essence, he believes: 'Don't seek to solve our problems with YOUR answer, solve them with THE answer.'
It is easy to point out the selection of Rahm Emanuel as pragmatic. He's one hell of a bitch to deal with when you're working to get something done. Hagel and Gates, even though they're Republicans, have showed that they are pragmatic in their military policy (especially Hagel, see the New Yorker's Nov. 3 piece on him called "Odd Man Out").
You've nailed it right on the head with that last question Andrew. It is indeed a bipartisan move, but the ultimate catalyst to these moves is a practical approach to problem solving. This is a bonafide example of Obama pragmatism.
Obama's cabinet certainly looks pragmatic. I can't remember the last time a new president kept a cabinet member from a previous administration, and when you remember the fact that Obama's predecessor was not only Republican, but W., the worst president of at least the half century, Obama's good idea to keep Gates as Secretary of Defense looks like an even better idea.
There will definitely be many Democrats who will howl over the move, but Gates would be a good choice, and Obama's realization of that fact is a good tiding for his presidency.
Post a Comment